RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The indications for surgical treatment of proximal hamstring ruptures are continuing to be refined. The purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients who underwent operative or nonoperative management of proximal hamstring ruptures. METHODS: A retrospective review of the electronic medical record identified all patients who were treated for a proximal hamstring rupture at our institution from 2013 to 2020. Patients were stratified into two groups, nonoperative or operative management, which were matched in a 2:1 ratio based on demographics (age, gender, and body mass index), chronicity of the injury, tendon retraction, and number of tendons torn. All patients completed a series of PROs including the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT), Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS), and the Tegner Activity Scale. Statistical analysis was performed using multi-variable linear regression and Mann-Whitney testing to compare nonparametric groups. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (mean age = 49.6 ± 12.9 years; median: 49.1; range: 19-73) with proximal hamstring ruptures treated nonoperatively were successfully matched 2:1 to 27 patients who had underwent primary surgical repair. There were no differences in PROs between the nonoperative and operative cohorts (n.s.). Chronicity of the injury and older age correlated with significantly worse PROs across the entire cohort (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of primarily middle-aged patients with proximal hamstring ruptures with less than three centimeters of tendon retraction, there was no difference in patient-reported outcome scores between matched cohorts of operatively and nonoperatively managed injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.